Based on epidemiological data, the Huanan market in Wuhan was an early and major epicenter of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Two of the three earliest documented COVID-19 cases were directly linked to this market selling wild animals, as were 28% of all cases reported in December 201910. Overall, 55% of cases during December 2019 had an exposure to either the Huanan or other markets in Wuhan, with these cases more prevalent in the first half of that month10. Examination of the locations of early cases shows that most cluster around the Huanan market, located north of the Yangtze river (Fig. 1a-e). These districts were also the first to exhibit excess pneumonia deaths in January 2020 (Fig. 1f-h). There is no epidemiological link to any other locality in Wuhan, including the BSL-4 campus of the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) located south of the Yangtze and the subject of considerable speculation. Although some early cases do not have a direct epidemiological link to a market10, this is expected given high rates of asymptomatic transmission and undocumented secondary transmission events, and was similarly observed in early SARS-CoV cases in Foshan3 . During 2019, markets in Wuhan – including the Huanan market – traded many thousands of live wild animals including high-risk species such as civets and raccoon dogs5 . Following its closure, SARS-CoV-2 was detected in environmental samples at the Huanan market, primarily in the western section that traded in wildlife and domestic animal products, as well as in associated drainage areas10. While animal carcasses retrospectively tested negative for SARS-CoV-2, these were unrepresentative of the live animal species sold, and specifically did not include raccoon dogs and other animals known to be susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 .
《我的评论》：
作者说: “最早记录的三起 COVID-19 病例中有两起与该市场销售野生动物直接相关”。但是根据中国内地学者最初的两份科研文章， 一篇来自高福领导的中国CDC实验室（Li Q et al., New England J of Med 2020, 382:1199-1207），另一篇来自武汉金银潭医院和中日友好医院曹彬领导的团队（Lancet. 2020 Feb 15; 395:497-506）。高福的文章中最早的两例（12月8日和12月10日）均与华南海鲜市场无关，而12月18日之前的七例病人中，仅两例有华南海鲜市场相关史。曹彬的文章中，最早一例是12月1日，与华南海鲜市场无关。而最早的4例病人中，3例与华南海鲜市场无关, 仅一例有华南海鲜市场相关史。在这个数据上，作者没有采用中国较权威的学者疫情初期发表在顶级杂志上的真实原始数据，而是采用中国政府后来修改过的数据，我真的替这些人悲哀！学者的求实精神丢那去了？
